People ex rel. Alford v. Berbary

2 A.D.3d 1337, 768 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14330
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 31, 2003
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2 A.D.3d 1337 (People ex rel. Alford v. Berbary) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People ex rel. Alford v. Berbary, 2 A.D.3d 1337, 768 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14330 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of Supreme Court, Erie County (Fahey, J.), entered January 16, 2002, which denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by dismissing that part of the petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that petitioner was denied his right to [1338]*1338discretionary parole release and as modified the judgment is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly determined that petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief based on his contention that he was denied his right to discretionary parole release after serving his minimum sentence, but the court should have dismissed the petition to that extent rather than denying it. We therefore modify the judgment accordingly (see People ex rel. Stevenson v Beaver, 309 AD2d 1171 [2003]). Petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief on that ground because “[p] arole decisions are discretionary and prisoners have no right to be released prior to the expiration of their sentences” (People ex rel. Sansalone v Schriver, 252 AD2d 605, 605 [1998]; see People ex rel. Harris v New York State Div. of Parole, 306 AD2d 938 [2003]; People ex rel. Daniels v Beaver, 303 AD2d 1025 [2003]), and thus petitioner would not be entitled to immediate release in any event (see Stevenson, 309 AD2d 1171 [2003]). We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit. Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

VAN NORSTRAND, GLENN E. v. GRAHAM, HAROLD D.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
People ex rel. Van Norstrand v. Graham
81 A.D.3d 1248 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 A.D.3d 1337, 768 N.Y.S.2d 920, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-alford-v-berbary-nyappdiv-2003.